You are not talking about the Open Systems Interconnection model, right? That's a protocol stack that died in the '90s and has been supplanted by a networking stack that was deliberately designed to not be like the OSI model. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3439
If you didn't noticed, I always put "OSI Layer N" in the double quotes.
It's just an example of well known stack. My comment has nothing to do with networking protocols.
Recently some people refer to it, to explain some concepts. Some even comparing Peninsula in Bay Area to OSI, where is San-Francisco is "OSI Level 7" and Cupertino is "OSI Level 1" ;)
1)"OSI Level 7" (Social Networking, Web 2.0, Mobile Apps and Widgets companies).
2)"OSI Level 6" (Cloud, Big Data and BI/Analytics).
"OSI Layers 1-5" are more capital intensive and they are heavily underfunded.
My startup somewhere between the "OSI layers 5 and 6" and I fully agree with the people quoted in the article.
While using non-mainstream and exotic programming languages is fun, it has nothing to do with the actual problem domain. One can build "Facebook for cats" using Erlang/OTP and "Twitter for dogs" using Clojure, but they still not solving hard problems, mere a pet entertainment problem.
I have nothing against these languages. I myself using Erlang/OTP for solving problems in Semiconductors industry.